orcrist
If you have a friend or family member, living or dead in Palestine, how could you vote for her? Even knowing Trump would probably be worse, it’s hard to imagine the pain it would cause to choose her name, knowing what she supported, and would have continued to encourage.
(Others mentioned other reasons, and I won’t repeat theirs.)
First of all, it is hard to beat career politicians. They have a track record, experience. Second, you’re in Nebraska. Third, and most importantly, the goal is not for a single person to win, but to build a strong organization that will make people’s lives better, and that would over time get more people to vote, because they would understand that it matters.
In other words, big corporate Democrats are mediocre at best, and often much worse than that, so of course people stay home. But if you think they’re the wave of the future, hey, do whatever you like.
I think that is an oversimplification. He won the popular vote, but that’s the majority of voters, not the majority of people, right? So we cannot accurately say that the majority is fascist. We can only say that the voting majority is fascist.
And then we need to look at who was conned, and how. Of course people who got conned need to work harder to avoid that in the future. We all agree on that. At the same time, the con artists and the people who enable the con, we also need to identify them and figure out what’s making them successful. If we talk about major newspapers and TV networks failing to cover how bad Trump actually was, or putting Harris on unrealistic pedestal, newspaper owners refusing to allow newspaper editors to endorse a candidate, the way Fox News preys on people who grew up trusting TV news and now have only watched Fox for the last two decades, open lies about who’s eating cats and dogs, a DNC that pushes centrist candidates even after 2016 when the weakness was exposed, and it’s clear that many left-wing voters are wildly unhappy, those are all things that smaller groups have done to help create the situation that we saw yesterday. And that’s just a short list.
So what I hope we can do, is I hope we can avoid saying something trite like, this is what the American people wanted, full stop. If you want to make that a conversation starter, go for it. But it shouldn’t be a dismissive conversation ender, because it ignores what actually happened and What will continue to happen in the future.
Oh I don’t think you get to paint the church in a positive light. It’s been a very long time, if ever, since organized religion has been a positive force in the United States.
Just go on a trip every birthday. It works for me.
Slow down, my friend. First, recognize that women have and do vote Republican, too. As their friends or other women in their communities have to deal with horrible situations that are even vaguely similar to these, you can imagine how quickly their views are going to shift.
Actually, you don’t even have to imagine it. You can just look at some of the data we’ve seen from early voting around the country. It turns out that when you have laws that f*** over women in obvious and horrible ways, a lot of women react negatively to it. A fair amount of men, too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita
The second graph supports the general claim, with several countries ranging between a quarter and half as much as US costs. We can take a look at that graph and see that $10,000 figure for the US, and then go look at the $2,500-3,000 range and find several countries there that have much longer lifespans.
Both Israel and South Korea have universal health care but of course the details for everything are highly relevant. Anyway, I think we can safely say that your conclusion above, that the US system is not four times as bad as a universal system, is presumably false, based on the Israel counterexample.
Your historical information is accurate, but I disagree with your framing. This particular scam is so powerful because the information is organized, parsed, and delivered in a fashion that makes it look professional and makes it look believable.
Google and the other AI companies have put themselves in mind. They know that their system is encouraging this type of scam, but they don’t dare put giant disclaimers at the top of every AI generated paragraph, because they’re trying to pretend that their s*** is good, except when it’s not, and then it’s not their fault. In other words, it’s basic dishonesty.
I feel like Jason ought to have considered it. Spammers have been using this kind of tactic for decades. Of course they’re going to change to whatever medium is popular.
